Thursday Open Thread

“We do not talk – we bludgeon one another with facts and theories gleaned from cursory readings of newspapers, magazines and digests.”

–Henry Miller

The Heidi Ganahl Campaign Is Completely Off the Rails

THURSDAY UPDATE: right-wing “parent’s group” Jeffco Kids First promises to prove Heidi Ganahl right on the supposed “furry” invasion:

We can’t wait.


We wrote on Monday about Republican gubernatorial candidate Hiedi Heidi Ganahl’s completely ridiculous claim on right-wing radio that there are “furries in Colorado schools.” Somehow, the Ganahl campaign figured out a way to make this story even worse for themselves.

Kyle Clark of 9News touched on the subject in a brief segment on Tuesday that absolutely CRUSHED Ganahl for her comments, noting that this is a subject that has already been thoroughly debunked and promoting it could be harmful to transgender students who already face high suicide rates.




The Ganahl campaign actually responded to 9News when asked to provide proof of her allegations, which Clark covers at about the :30 second mark in the video above. This is what the Ganahl camp sent to 9News as evidence of her claims that furries are invading Colorado schools:


That is exactly what you think it is: A random picture of a person in a costume pulled off the Internet. This makes less sense than presenting a photo of Chuck E. Cheese as proof that restaurants in Colorado are infested with rodents.

We can laugh at all of this, though only to a point. This entire episode is one of the more bizarre events we can recall in our many years of covering Colorado politics, but it speaks to a bigger issue: What in the hell is going on over at the Ganahl campaign? This is not a normal political operation. This is complete insanity.

It’s been clear for a long time that Ganahl is an unserious person running an unserious campaign for the top job in Colorado. Ganahl is not going to come close to defeating incumbent Democrat Jared Polis, and thank goodness for that. We’ve zoomed past the partisan political argument at this point; it is not hyperbole to say that putting Ganahl in charge of an entire state would be flat-out dangerous. 

The more important story for Republicans for the next few months will be about assessing the collateral damage from what will unquestionably go down as the worst major campaign in state history. Every single person who had any association with the Ganahl campaign will be forever tainted (for example, Danny Moore’s political career is over).

Colorado Republicans should now hope that Ganahl just goes away quietly. The more desperate Ganahl becomes in the final weeks of this race, the more likely she is to make increasingly offensive statements that reflect negatively on the entire Republican Party.

Ganahl is going down. That’s inescapable. The only mystery remaining is about who she takes down with her.

Residency Questions Clear One Candidate, Imperil Another

Dennis Hisey won’t be sending a Christmas card to George Brauchler

Where did you live and when did you live there?

This has been a recurring theme in recent months in relation to a handful of residency challenges involving candidates for state legislative seats. Republicans have been particularly aggressive in trying to make a case stick against a few Democrats, but it appears that they royally screwed up in one misguided attempt to trip up State Senate candidate Kyle Mullica.

We’ll get to that in a moment, but first some background: In August, outgoing State Sen. Pete Lee (D-Colorado Springs) was indicted by a grand jury for allegations that he registered to vote at an address in which he did not actually live. A few weeks later, it was revealed that Republican State Sen. Dennis Hisey (who is running against Democrat Tony Exum) was moving around like a political transient. Republican attorneys Suzanne Staiert Taheri and the “Magnificent PutzGeorge Brauchler then went after Mullica.

As Sara Wilson writes today for Colorado Newsline, another Democrat is in Republican crosshairs:

Boulder County Republicans Chair Theresa Watson submitted a complaint to the Boulder County district attorney’s office last week, according to the party’s Facebook page and as first reported by The Daily Camera, against state Rep. Tracey Bernett.

The complaint alleges that Bernett, a Democrat, changed her address in order to remain eligible to run for reelection in House District 12, even though she still lives at a house that now sits in the newly drawn House District 19.

House District 12 is a pretty safe seat for Democrats given its voter registration makeup, so whatever happens with Bernett won’t likely affect the partisan makeup of the state legislature. That’s a different story for Republicans and Hisey, whose case got more problematic because of how far Taheri and Brauchler pushed their losing case against Mullica.

Democrat Kyle Mullica

As The Colorado Sun reported last week:

After a daylong hearing that featured testimony from a private investigator and questions from two high-powered partisan attorneys, Denver District Court Judge Alex C. Myers ruled late Wednesday that state Rep. Kyle Mullica, a Democrat, did not violate a requirement that candidates for Colorado statehouse seats live in the district they are running to represent for a year before Election Day.

Mullica is running to represent Senate District 24 in a closely watched race against Republican Courtney Potter, an Adams 12 Five Star Schools board member. Until November of last year he was registered to vote at his family’s home in Northglenn, where his wife was a city council member. But on Nov. 4, 2021, he changed his voter registration to his mother’s house in Federal Heights.

Mullica says he moved in with his mother to help her manage some health and financial issues. His wife and children stayed in Northglenn.

Taheri and Brauchler apparently didn’t really think through their challenge and what it could mean for the case against Hisey. Their failed Mullica challenge inadvertently proved that Hisey is almost certainly ineligible to seek election in SD-11 (something that was already making Republicans very nervous).

Back to the Sun:

Mullica testified, under questioning from former 18th Judicial District Attorney George Brauchler, a Republican, that he would frequently visit his family at the Northglenn home — and sometimes spend the night there — but that he always intended his residence to be his mother’s Federal Heights home after moving there in November 2021. Mullica said moving into his mom’s house was a difficult decision because it meant he couldn’t run for reelection to his House seat, but that she was facing physical and mental health challenges and was struggling with her finances…

Myers, the judge overseeing the case, said his ruling was a “close call,” but that he found Mullica’s explanation of why he moved credible.

“It is apparent that Rep. Mullica genuinely wanted to care for his mother and moved for that purpose,” Myers wrote. [Pols emphasis]

The case against Mullica ended with a judge agreeing that the Adams County Democrat went about his own residency change in the right way; Mullica clearly had roots in the district in which he lived before he launched his campaign for State Senate.

[Pro Tip: If you ever need an attorney, you’re better off picking someone off of Google than hiring Brauchler, who continually proves that he is the legal equivalent of Nick Riviera from The Simpsons.]


Here’s a visual representation of Sen. Dennis Hisey’s current problem.


In short, the Mullica ruling sets a precedent that Hisey cannot possibly follow. In an effort to establish residency in SD-11, Hisey “moved” into a house owned by his stepson (Residence #2 above), but Hisey admitted to KRDO in August that he did not have a lease agreement that would be required to establish legal residency. Hisey has since “moved” into an apartment on Westmeadow Drive (Residence #3), though his wife still lives in their longtime home in Fountain (Residence #1).

In their zeal to get Mullica in trouble, Taheri and Brauchler failed to consider the liability on their own side of the political aisle, and Hisey is likely going to pay for their mistake.

Next time, look before you litigate.

Boebert Explores Novel Methods Of Book Grifting

Lauren Boebert’s book.

As everybody knows, politicians like to write books–or at least have books published under their name to which they contributed enough to claim the credit. Most of those books do not go on to become best-sellers, and usually wind up in the bargain bin at Walmart within a year or two.

But as Forbes’ Zach Everson reports today, freshman GOP scandal-o-rama Rep. Lauren Boebert appears to have found a new and creative way to merge her personal and campaign interests. Otherwise known by the less flattering term grifting:

On or before May 5, Boebert’s campaign began running an ad for her new book, “My American Life,” on WinRed, the Republican’s online fundraising platform that is typically used to solicit campaign donations. While a disclaimer at the bottom says that WinRed paid for the ad, the URL includes lauren-boebert-for-congress, and the ad has an option to sign up for updates from Lauren Boebert for Congress.

WinRed regularly runs ads in which candidates offer their book in exchange for a campaign donation. In those circumstances, the Federal Election Commission requires the campaign to buy the book in a manner that won’t lead to a royalty for the author (which is typically done by purchasing directly from the publisher at a discount).

Boebert’s ad is different. It directs supporters to buy her books from retailers, like Amazon and Books-A-Million, which could theoretically lead to royalties. [Pols emphasis]

Over the summer, Boebert’s campaign reported an expenditure of over $30,000 to purchase copies of Boebert’s book My American Life for the campaign’s use–which didn’t raise alarm bells by itself, since campaigns are allowed to buy copies of a candidate’s book to use for fundraising and promotional purposes, and there are rules to make sure those transactions don’t benefit the candidate personally.

But those aren’t the books Boebert is hawking when she puts up ads directing to Amazon. Amazon is selling Boebert’s book at full retail price, and those are sales that Boebert stands to profit from. It’s a problem for Boebert, but also for the WinRed Republican online fundraising platform–who it can be argued is helping put money directly into Boebert’s pocket, not Boebert’s campaign.

If there’s anything Boebert has proven adept at in her first term in office, it’s beating the high cost of living with questionable financial opportunities afforded her as a political luminary. Whether it’s reimbursing herself for more vehicle mileage than the Earth’s circumference or using her campaign account as a short-term loan shop, Boebert has pushed the limits on financial ethics more than any Colorado politico in recent memory.

Here’s another way she’s doing so–and we’ll have to see if CD-3 voters have any limit to their tolerance.

Kirkmeyer Steps on Trump Landmine in New Interview

Will explode. Cannot be disarmed.

Republican “Secession” Barb Kirkmeyer may have (metaphorically) blown off a limb today that could make it more difficult for her to edge past Democrat Yadira Caraveo in the race for the new congressional seat in CO-08.

In an interview with Ryan Warner of Colorado Public Radio, Kirkmeyer addressed the topic of one Donald J. Trump in a manner that won’t likely be beneficial to the rest of her campaign:

Warner: Much of the narrative around the 2020 election has come specifically from former President Trump. Would you vote for him if he ran again?

Kirkmeyer: I don’t know who else is running, for starters. So I don’t know. Did I vote for him in 2016? Yes, I did. Did I vote for him in 2020? Yes, I did. If he is our Republican nominee, yes I would probably vote for him. [Pols emphasis]


Barb Kirkmeyer

Kirkmeyer might have just instinctively answered this question, since her former elected offices (Weld County Commissioner and State Senate) were representative of areas that were as far-right as she is. If you live in deep-red Weld County, of course you voted for Trump.

But the “Cook Partisan Voter Index” for CO-08 is considered “EVEN,” and the areas that are now part of this district collectively voted for Democrat Joe Biden over Donald Trump in 2020 (51-46). The flurry of terrible news that continues to greet Trump on basically a weekly basis has not been kind to his approval ratings, either.

It is absolutely problematic for Kirkmeyer to have admitted that she would vote for Trump again if he ran for President in 2024. In a district this competitive, voicing your support for Trump could be all that many undecided voters need to hear to go in a different direction. Republican Senate candidate Joe O’Dea has been furiously backpedaling on his previous support of Trump for precisely this reason.

Kirkmeyer’s fealty to Trump is also odd given that she has had no problem pretending to ignore issues like her opposition to abortion rights — something that is near and dear to her heart.

But Barb’s gonna Barb, we suppose. It’s gotten her this far.

This Candidate is All Over the Distric

This is Lynn Emrick. She is the Republican candidate in House District 27 — facing off against incumbent Democratic Rep. Brianna Titone — who has only been a candidate since August after winning a vacancy committee appointment to replace the GOP nominee who had dropped out of the race.

Emrick is very excited about running for the State House of Representatives. So excited, in fact, that she didn’t bother to spellcheck her own sign:

Spell it right for the ‘gram


Did Emrick not know how to spell “District,” or did her graphic designer just run out of space and hoped nobody would notice the missing ‘T’?

This also touches on a long-running irritation of ours here at Colorado Pols: Candidates who put their House or Senate district number on yard signs or literature. All candidates, no matter the political party, must stop this nonsense. Most voters don’t know the number of their House or Senate district and don’t care. It’s not like voters can pick which district they want to vote in. Your name will be on their ballot, or it won’t.

Anyway, who is Lynn Emrick? As Ernest Luning reported last month for the publication formerly known as the Colorado Statesman:

Last year, Emrick and five other moms founded Acts Academy, a private Christian school attached to a church in Wheat Ridge that enrolls children from pre-school through fifth grade, according to Facebook posts.

“We are bringing God back to the forefront of education and desire a return to foundational values that are centered on Christ and His Word, the core family service to our community and charter modeled after Jesus’ example and the fruits of the Spirit,” a promotional brochure for the school says.

Apparently Emrick is very much influenced by the teachings of Jesus Chris.

Emrick is listed on LinkedIn as the founder of some sort of baby supply rental company (or maybe it rents babies; we didn’t really look into it). Her Christian elementary school is apparently no longer open, which probably doesn’t reflect all that well on the candidate.

According to the Arvada Press, Emrick seems to believe the “MAGA Republican” nonsense rhetoric about public school teachers turning children into drag queens, or whatever:

Emrick also pledged to “keep politics out” of the classroom and mentioned “sexualized content” and “gender identity vocabulary” as programs being taught without parental permission.

“Hidden club activities attendance without parent knowledge, teaching any sexualized content outside approved curriculum, teaching young children gender identity vocabulary, assignments or technology that contains controversial content that has not been approved without the parent’s knowledgment (sic) is out of line within our classrooms,” Emrick said.

Emrick says she wants schools to focus on teaching the basics.

Like spelling, for example.

Colorado Democrats Vindicated On Equal Pay Law

In 2019, the Colorado General Assembly’s Democratic majority passed the Equal Pay For Equal Work Act, Senate Bill 19-085, which required among other provisions for Colorado employers to post the salary range for available positions in job postings. Transparency in salary range is considered a vital component to reducing gender-based wage inequity.

The bill passed over the strained objections of the Republican minority, as the Denver Post’s Justin Wingerter reported at the time:

“It’s not so much of a woman thing,” said Rep. Perry Buck, a Windsor Republican and opponent of the bill, during House debate Friday. “I don’t believe in the women as being victims. [Pols emphasis] You look at how many are graduating with degrees. Women are on a movement and look at the legislature. There is absolutely, definitely equal pay here.”

Buck and business groups say they fear frivolous lawsuits will increase, costing companies even when they’ve done nothing wrong. The National Federation of Independent Business opposed the bill, saying most Colorado small businesses don’t have a legal department and could be bankrupted by a lawsuit. Plus, it says, salary history is a necessary tool for determining qualified applicants.

Republican amendments would have allowed companies to be reimbursed legal fees by an employee whose discrimination claim was found to be baseless and allowed for voluntary disclosure of salary history, but those amendments failed in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

After the Equal Pay For Equal Work Act took effect in January of 2021, the same Republicans who opposed the bill in 2019 were (no nice way to say this) inappropriately overjoyed when some employers began excluding Colorado applicants for remote work in job listings in retaliation for Colorado’s requirement that salary ranges be posted in job listings. Conservative outlets like Reason rejoiced that the “Equal Pay Law in Colorado is backfiring.”

A new employee compensation bill in Colorado was supposed to help close gender gaps in worker pay. But the so-called Equal Pay for Equal Work Act could be making it harder for Colorado residents—regardless of gender—to find jobs…

Understandably, some employers who can help it are opting out.

“This is a remote job except that it is not eligible to be performed in Colorado,” says an Airbnb listing for an accounting manager.

“This work is to be performed entirely outside of Colorado,” says an Ally Financial posting about a developer position.

But then a funny thing happened–although the number of position postings for Colorado jobs dropped, as CNBC reports, our state’s labor participation rate actually went up:

Two notable things happened in the first year after the law went into effect, research author Sam Kuhn tells CNBC Make It: First, daily job postings on Indeed fell by 8.2% in Colorado compared with neighboring Utah (which was chosen as a control for having similar demographics and economic characteristics).

The drop in Colorado jobs corresponds with reports that companies were actively barring workers in the state from applying to some remote jobs, or were taking the work elsewhere, in order to avoid the posting requirement.

Second, data shows there was a 1.5% increase in Colorado’s labor force participation rate relative to Utah’s.

By June of this year, as the Colorado Sun’s Tamara Chaung reported, the entire debate over salary transparency had shifted thanks in no small part to Colorado’s visionary and much-maligned new law breaking open the discussion:


Conservative Nonprofit To Hire Tina Peters To Spread The Big Lie

(MAGA job security — Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Clerk Tina Peters pitching her movie screening and Q&A.

Conspiracist clerk Tina Peters, who faces multiple felony charges for election-fraud-related crimes, answered questions at a pair of screenings of the faux-documentary “Selection Code” last week in Pueblo and Colorado Springs. The conspiracy movie, which stars Peters herself, makes debunked claims that not only the 2020 presidential election but also the 2021 Grand Junction municipal election were stolen from the rightful conservative winners.

A far-right nonprofit group led by members of two prominent Colorado conservative organizations, Colorado Christian University and the Independence Institute, sponsored the events. Americans for America (A4A) collected the money for the event series, “Ten For Tina.”

“Ten For Tina” event flyer. QR code links to Americans for America site.

Reached for comment, A4A President Regina Thomson describes the event as a “in effect, a fundraiser for Tina.”

Thomson, a 2016 RNC delegate, says the group is asking for donations for tomorrow’s event in order to fund a contract to pay Peters to “go out and speak and educate on election integrity issues” starting next year. “Right now as an elected official, any money she gets other than her paycheck she has to file a report with the secretary of state and tell them what she got, and she’s under so much scrutiny that we’re not going to put her in that kind of spot at the moment,” says Thomson. “So we’re looking forward to contracting with her right after the first of the year to go out and speak on the same thing she’s speaking about now, when she’s not an elected official any longer.”

“She’s one of our upcoming projects to go out and speak on election integrity,” says Thomson. “It’s all legal and above board, it’s just that we don’t want her to have a target on her back any bigger than she does until she’s out of office.”


Joe O’Dea Tries Out Bizarre New Argument

Republican Senate candidate Joe O’Dea has offered up so many different positions on important issues that it’s hard to believe that he even knows where he stands at any particular moment. But his latest argument for why Colorado voters should elect him to the U.S. Senate instead of incumbent Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet is one of the more absurd efforts we’ve seen in Colorado for a long time.

O’Dea posted a strange Tweet today that includes an embedded video clip from a recent interview with Kyle Clark of 9News — an interview that was plainly a disaster for O’Dea. As far as we can tell, the point of including this clip is so that the O’Dea campaign can make the argument that there’s no harm in electing him to the Senate because he won’t get anything accomplished anyway.

Here’s what Clark says in the clip:

Colorado’s Senate race, where Republican Joe O’Dea supports abortion rights until 20 weeks, highlights what’s at stake with control of the Senate. O’Dea’s campaign says he would not support [Sen. Lindsey] Graham’s 15-week abortion ban. O’Dea recently told NEXT he’ll vote in the Senate to codify [Roe v. Wade].

But he seemed confused when we pointed out that, if he wins and Republicans control the Senate, there will never be such a vote. [Pols emphasis]

[Again: This clip was Tweeted out FROM THE ACCOUNT @ODEAFORCOLORADO. O’Dea’s campaign WANTS you to see this.]

The embedded video then cuts to Clark asking O’Dea about the fact that a Republican-controlled Senate would never hold a vote to codify Roe v. Wade. O’Dea disputes this assertion from Clark without any evidence whatsoever.


What could go wrong?

The only thing we can compare this to is Republican Cory Gardner’s 2014 Senate campaign, in which Gardner convinced local media outlets that nothing bad could happen if he was elected because issues like abortion rights and same-sex marriage were “settled law” that would never be changed anyway. But even then, Gardner wasn’t quite as direct as O’Dea in making the argument that electing him would be largely pointless.

From a practical perspective, the problem with this narrative is that you don’t NEED 60 votes in the Senate when the Supreme Court is running roughshod over all of these things that were supposedly “settled law.” And since O’Dea has made it clear that he would have voted for all of the same Republican-backed SCOTUS nominees that brought us the end of Roe v. Wade, supporting O’Dea’s Senate bid is far from harmless.

From a strategic perspective, this is all very strange. Is O’Dea’s closing argument really going to be that Colorado voters should send him to the Senate just for the hell of it? This isn’t far off from producing a television ad that encourages Coloradans to flip a coin.

Vote for me, Joe O’Dea!

Or don’t. What do I care?

Here Come the Political Ads!

We are six weeks away from Election Day and three weeks from ballots going out in the mail. This means that top-tier campaigns that plan to use television as a significant part of their advertising strategy are hitting the airwaves with gusto.

Click after the jump to see all the latest television ads running in Colorado, nearly all of which are from Democrats (we’re listing ads from campaigns, not dark money or third-party spots). We’re also not ignoring ads for Republican candidates — there just aren’t many of them to even discuss.

If we missed any new ads, please drop them in the comments section…



Tom Cotton Is Not A Nice Man, Joe O’Dea

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) with Colorado GOP Senate candidate Joe O’Dea.

As the Denver Post’s Nick Coltrain reports, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Joe O’Dea, running on a counter-brand triangulation strategy to minimize the negatives of running as a Republican in a blue-trending state, made another head-scratching move to confound that message by inviting far-right firebrand U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas to campaign with him in Greenwood Village:

Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, is a high-profile surrogate for conservatives who frequently campaigns for like-minded candidates. Having O’Dea serving in the Senate — and part of a Republican majority — would mean strides in beefing up border security, Cotton said…

O’Dea, Cotton and moderator George Brauchler tied border security to the fentanyl crisis, arguing that an overwhelmed border patrol leaves more gaps for cartels to smuggle the opiate into the country.

But as Coltrain fact-checks in real time, which we love and don’t see enough:

A recent study by the libertarian Cato Institute found that more than 90% of fentanyl seizures at the border happen at legal crossing points, not illegal migration routes, and 86% of convicted fentanyl traffickers are U.S. citizens. The study also found a miniscule number of people arrested for illegal border crossing — .02% — had any fentanyl on them whatsoever.

In short, the whole premise of O’Dea’s event with Sen. Cotton is bogus. And that’s as good a segue as any into the background of Sen. Tom Cotton, whose record as one of the most cantankerously partisan and factually indifferent members of the GOP Senate caucus makes him a inexplicable choice to show off to Colorado swing voters. In 2020, Cotton wrote a New York Times op-ed that called for turning the military on racial justice protesters, resulting in backlash and ultimately the resignation of the editorial page editor. Cotton has said that the only problem with the notorious Guantanamo Bay prison is “too many empty beds,” that “waterboarding isn’t torture,” and that “bombing makes us safer.”

Just a few days before his appearance with Joe O’Dea, here’s what Sen. Cotton was up in arms about on Fox News:

Folks, there’s no “supposed” problem with white supremacists in the military. There’s a very real problem, which the Pentagon has acknowledged and is trying to fix. Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas’ defensiveness over this unfortunate reality raises some pointed questions.

Perhaps after Joe O’Dea admits to his mistake on fentanyl, he can answer some questions about white supremacy in the military? In both cases it’s O’Dea’s own choices that make these questions relevant. Nobody forced O’Dea to bring one of the Senate’s most truculent partisan combatants to Colorado any more than O’Dea was forced to kiss Mitch McConnell’s ring. While Michael Bennet goes rafting with Mitt Romney, Joe O’Dea trots out partisan usual suspects to frighten voters with known falsehoods.

The contrast could not be plainer.

The Real Heidi Ganahl Stands Up, and She is Completely Bananas

There was a time during the 2022 race for Governor where we wondered if GOP candidate Hiedi Heidi Ganahl was actually a true believer in the mold of the Qanon-loving, MAGA Republican election deniers that dominate the base of the Republican Party…or if she was merely pandering to the base in order to make sure she won the Republican Primary for Governor.

We once assumed — in retrospect very generously — that Ganahl was trying to walk a tightrope connecting her to the GOP base when she consistently refused to say that the 2020 Presidential election was conducted fairly. But as time went on and Ganahl held fast to her refusal to answer what she called “divisive questions,” this position became harder to defend. Ganahl continued to stand by the likes of former visiting CU Professor and coup architect John Eastman, and then in July she picked an election denier (Danny Moore) as her running mate and nominee for Lieutenant Governor.

As more evidence mounted, we started to wonder if perhaps Ganahl actually believed all of this election truther nonsense.


We’re absolutely sure of it. Heidi Ganahl, the Republican nominee for Governor of Colorado, is at least as crazy as every other wackadoodle conspiracy theorist in our state…and maybe more.

As Heidi Beedle reports for the Colorado Times Recorder:

Heidi Ganahl is the latest Republican to repeat outrageous and thoroughly debunked claims about furries in public schools.

“Not many people know that we have furries in Colorado schools,” said Ganahl during a Saturday appearance on Jimmy Sengenberger’s KNUS radio show.

“Have you heard about this story?” Ganahl asked Sengenberger. “Yeah, kids identifying as cats. It sounds absolutely ridiculous, but it’s happening all over Colorado and schools are tolerating it. It’s insane. What on earth are we doing? Knock it off, schools. Put your foot down. Like, stop it. Let’s get back to teaching basics and not allow this woke ideology, ideological stuff, infiltrate our schools. And it is happening here in Colorado. It’s why I moved from Boulder Valley to Douglas County, because it was happening in my kids schools four years ago.” [Pols emphasis]

Ganahl joins Republican Colorado Springs House Scott Bottoms and U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) in repeating patently ridiculous — and false — claims about furries in public schools. The outrage over students who are a part of the niche subculture that embraces anthropomorphic art and cosplay — and is predominantly LGBTQ — stems from remarks made by Nebraska Sen. Bruce Bostelman, a conservative Republican, who repeated false claims about furries using litter boxes in schools during a televised debate on a bill intended to help students who have behavioral problems.

Bostelman has since apologized and retracted his statements.


Yes, Ganahl actually said all of this. Listen for yourself:



Clearly, this story is gaining legs (er, peels):


Last week Ganahl unveiled a transportation “plan” that was just a bunch of bullet points about roads she wanted to fix, wrapped in a package of ideas that incumbent Gov. Jared Polis was already doing. We wrote that her “plan” was further proof that Ganahl was not a serious person, nor a serious candidate.

We’ve now crossed over into a different territory altogether. Ganahl legitimately believes that Colorado schools are allowing children — most of whom she claims can’t read or do math — to run around in cat costumes instead of “teaching the basics” in class. She literally said ON THE RADIO — two days ago — that she moved from Boulder to Douglas County so that her children could escape this feline furry fanaticism. If this were really happening like Ganahl claims, wouldn’t everyone know about it by now?

Heidi Ganahl is out of her goddamned mind. We’d offer anyone the opportunity to “change our mind,” but it would be a pointless endeavor. You can’t. Nobody can.

This is the actual Republican nominee for Governor in Colorado in 2022.